Oakman v. Walker
Supreme Court of Vermont
Bill in Chancery. Heard on tbe pleadings, master’s report and exceptions thereto, at tbe September Term, 1896, Rutland County. Rowell, Chancellor, decreed that the orator might redeem by paying the debt in stated installments.
Read the full summary
Bill in Chancery. Heard on tbe pleadings, master’s report and exceptions thereto, at tbe September Term, 1896, Rutland County. Rowell, Chancellor, decreed that the orator might redeem by paying the debt in stated installments. The note referred to in the opinion was payable in annual installments of one hundred dollars beginning with July 9, 1871. The bill was brought by William P. Oakman, the grantee of James Oakman, Jr., against the heirs of Margaret Alford and the executor of her will. Said executor answered and filed a cross bill praying a foreclosure of the orator’s equity. The findings…
1Opinion of the CourtRoss, C. J.
By the terms of the warranty deed from James Oakman, Sr., to James Oakman, Jr., dated July 9, 1870, the property was not to vest in the grantee until he performed the two conditions therein named: allowed the grantor to retain possession of the premises during the grantor’s natural life; and paid his note then given to the grantor for nine hundred dollars. Under this deed, standing alone, it was incumbent on the grantee and those claiming under him to show a performance of these conditions, in order to have the title vest in the grantee. Under it the grantee was never in possession and…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Welsh v. PhillipsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1875
- Collamer v. LangdonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1856
- Chickering v. Rutland RailroadSupreme Court of Vermont · 1883
3Cited by3 opinions
- Phelps v. RootSupreme Court of Vermont · 1906
- Eugley v. SproulSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1916
- Sowles v. LewisSupreme Court of Vermont · 1902